On the legal evaluation of reconstruction policy and Proposals of new laws.
Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (B)
|Allocation Type||Single-year Grants |
|Research Institution||Kobe University |
ABE Yasutaka Kobe University, Professor, 法学部, 教授 (80030617)
|Project Period (FY)
1997 – 1999
Completed (Fiscal Year 1999)
|Budget Amount *help
¥4,900,000 (Direct Cost: ¥4,900,000)
Fiscal Year 1999: ¥1,400,000 (Direct Cost: ¥1,400,000)
Fiscal Year 1998: ¥1,400,000 (Direct Cost: ¥1,400,000)
Fiscal Year 1997: ¥2,100,000 (Direct Cost: ¥2,100,000)
|Keywords||constitutional evaluation of measures to be taken against great disaster / non comprehensive policy / alteration from single line housing policy to multiple line / reverse mortgage instead of earthquake insurance / flexible livelihood assistance act at the earthquake / repair instead of reconstruction / rapid town recovery / assistance of victims by the disaster in Formosa / まちづくり / 生活再建 / 住宅再建 / 住人補償 / 地震保険 / マンション法 / 憲法解釈 / 阪神・淡路大震災 / 災害救助法 / 都市計画 / 区画整理 / 公的支援 / 再開発|
This research aims at a critical legal evaluation on the policies for the countermeasures against the great disaster and alternative legislative proposals. I think that our constitution asks us to set a point of view that every victim should be supported rapidly, fairly according to their needs. I checked almost all legal policies that were made after the great disaster. I found that our legislature is too stiff to create uniform and proper policies.
The fundamental act for the countermeasures against great disasters is a little amended and some new acts like the act for the repair of old buildings to survive the earthquake were enacted. But these measures are not sufficient because the former can not function well in the great disaster and the later is not sufficient to encourage homeowners to repair their buildings.
The local ordinances of Tokyo, Sizuoka prefecture for the countermeasures against the earthquake have not offered enough measures.
The place for the victims to live in is at
first the neighboring school and so on, then temporary houses then at last public welfare houses. This system is improper because the cost is too high in comparison to the benefit, the too many public welfare houses need too great costs and destroy the community and some disable and sick people can not live in such school. I propose to introduce by a law reform a new policy to rent private house for the victims or subsidize them some rent. Those people that moved far get more subsidies. The temporary act about the tenancy in the destroyed cities should be abolished.
The redevelopment, land adjustment and reconstruction of condominiums can not be highly evaluated from my point of view. Destroyed Buildings should be repaired as much as possible Towns should not be altered on a large scale.
Compulsory earthquake insurance is not feasible practically and legally. The introduction of reverse mortgage is suitable for those people who lost their house and can not rebuild their houses because of lack of enough capitals for that.
The practice of livelihood assistance act is not flexible also at the earthquake and needs another more flexible system.
The legal system of assistance for the victims by the disaster should be based on the discretion of local government instead of the control of the central government. This discretion is exercised by the local ordinance that is enacted through the discussion in the city and prefecture council. This is so called administration according to the law(gesetzmaessige Verwaltung, rule of law).
The U.S government acted in the Northridge earthquake very rapidly to give victims money for the repair, subsidize rent. The Formosa Government in the earthquake in Sep.1999 acted very rapidly in giving rent subsidies and condolence money. Less
Report (4 results)
Research Products (26 results)